From: "Andres Lagar-Cavilla" <andres@lagarcavilla.org>
To: xen-devel@lists.xen.org
Cc: xudong.hao@intel.com, tim@xen.org, xiantao.zhang@intel.com,
Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] xen/p2m: Using INVALID_MFN instead of mfn_valid
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 10:17:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <35799d4871cec6ffe122121e59d930fe.squirrel@webmail.lagarcavilla.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <mailman.10813.1345115327.1399.xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
>
> At 11:41 +0100 on 16 Aug (1345117281), Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 16.08.12 at 12:31, "Hao, Xudong" <xudong.hao@intel.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >>> On 15.08.12 at 08:57, Xudong Hao <xudong.hao@intel.com> wrote:
>> >> >> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m-ept.c Tue Jul 24 17:02:04 2012 +0200
>> >> >> > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m-ept.c Thu Jul 26 15:40:01 2012 +0800
>> >> >> > @@ -428,7 +428,7 @@ ept_set_entry(struct p2m_domain *p2m, un
>> >> >> > }
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > /* Track the highest gfn for which we have ever had a valid
>> mapping
>> >> */
>> >> >> > - if ( mfn_valid(mfn_x(mfn)) &&
>> >> >> > + if ( (mfn_x(mfn) != INVALID_MFN) &&
>> >> >> > (gfn + (1UL << order) - 1 > p2m->max_mapped_pfn) )
>> >> >> > p2m->max_mapped_pfn = gfn + (1UL << order) - 1;
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Depending on how the above comment gets addressed (i.e.
>> >> >> whether MMIO MFNs are to be considered here at all), this
>> >> >> might need changing anyway, as this a huge max_mapped_pfn
>> >> >> value likely wouldn't be very useful anymore.
>> >> >
>> >> > Your viewpoint is similar with us. Here max_mapped_pfn value is for
>> memory
>> >> > but not for MMIO. I think this is a simple changes, do you have
>> another
>> >> > suggestion?
>> >>
>> >> The question is why this needs to be changed at all. If this is
>> >> only about RAM, then mfn_valid() is the right thing to use. If
>> >> this is about MMIO too, then the condition is wrong already
>> >> (since, as we appear to agree, even now there can be MMIO
>> >> above RAM, provided there's little enough RAM).
>> >>
>> >
>> > The original code considered EPT only, now for the device assignment,
>> it
>> > need to consider MMIO. So how about remove the mfn_valid() here?
>>
>> I don't think it's there without reason, but I'm not sure. Tim?
>
> max_mapped_pfn should be the highest entry that's even had a mapping in
> the p2m. Its intent was to provide a fast path exit from p2m lookups in
> the (at the time) common case where _emulated_ MMIO addresses were
> higher than all the actual p2m mappings, and the cost of a failed lookup
> (on 32-bit) was a page fault in the linear map. Also, at the time, the
> p2m wasn't typed and we didn't support direct MMIO, so mfn_valid() was
> equivalent to 'entry is present'.
>
> These days, I'm not sure how useful max_mapped_pfn is, since (a) for any
> VM with >3GB RAM the emulated MMIO lookups are not avoided, and (b) on
> 64-bit builds there's not pagefault for a failed lookup. Also it seems to
> have been abused in a few places to do for() loops that touch every PFN
> instead of just walking the tries. So I might get rid of it after 4.2
> is out.
max_mapped_pfn also helps keep XENMEM_maximum_gpfn O(1).
Andres
>
> In the meantime, the patch at the top of this thread is definitely an
> improvement. However, I think this is a better fix:
>
> diff -r c887c30a0a35 xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m-ept.c
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m-ept.c Thu Aug 16 10:16:19 2012 +0200
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m-ept.c Thu Aug 16 11:57:44 2012 +0100
> @@ -428,7 +428,7 @@ ept_set_entry(struct p2m_domain *p2m, un
> }
>
> /* Track the highest gfn for which we have ever had a valid mapping
> */
> - if ( mfn_valid(mfn_x(mfn)) &&
> + if ( p2mt != p2m_invalid &&
> (gfn + (1UL << order) - 1 > p2m->max_mapped_pfn) )
> p2m->max_mapped_pfn = gfn + (1UL << order) - 1;
>
> diff -r c887c30a0a35 xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m-pt.c
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m-pt.c Thu Aug 16 10:16:19 2012 +0200
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m-pt.c Thu Aug 16 11:57:44 2012 +0100
> @@ -454,7 +454,7 @@ p2m_set_entry(struct p2m_domain *p2m, un
> }
>
> /* Track the highest gfn for which we have ever had a valid mapping
> */
> - if ( mfn_valid(mfn)
> + if ( p2mt != p2m_invalid
> && (gfn + (1UL << page_order) - 1 > p2m->max_mapped_pfn) )
> p2m->max_mapped_pfn = gfn + (1UL << page_order) - 1;
>
> and I'll commit it this afternoon or tomorrow.
>
> Tim.
>
next parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-16 17:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <mailman.10813.1345115327.1399.xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
2012-08-16 17:17 ` Andres Lagar-Cavilla [this message]
2012-08-16 17:47 ` [PATCH 2/3] xen/p2m: Using INVALID_MFN instead of mfn_valid Tim Deegan
2012-08-15 6:57 Xudong Hao
2012-08-15 9:21 ` Jan Beulich
2012-08-16 10:05 ` Hao, Xudong
2012-08-16 10:12 ` Jan Beulich
2012-08-16 10:31 ` Hao, Xudong
2012-08-16 10:41 ` Jan Beulich
2012-08-16 11:01 ` Tim Deegan
2012-08-16 19:14 ` Mukesh Rathor
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-08-15 6:55 Xudong Hao
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=35799d4871cec6ffe122121e59d930fe.squirrel@webmail.lagarcavilla.org \
--to=andres@lagarcavilla.org \
--cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=tim@xen.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.org \
--cc=xiantao.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=xudong.hao@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).